View Full Version : Question

03-14-2004, 10:03 PM
Ok, simple question on the 'bad motive' topic. How is it that this one, and a dozen or so others showing roughly the same angle and half of the engine is accepted http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=53486

Yet this one http://www.railpictures.net/viewreject.php?id=40535 is rejected as having bad motive. I appealed it and the reason I got was 'whole engine not in picture, go somewhere scenic'. Wouldn't that have fallen under the 'bad cropping' catagory? Alright, no problem. Then I go through the newest posts and find one of a CSX engine taken from the same angle, only difference being there weren't any trees or anything in the background. What makes one acceptable and one not? The whole bad motive thing is extremely vague. Makes it sound like the photographer was up to something. By the way, the focus on the rejected shot was on the 'PC' logo someone put in the dirt on this engine. This train stopped briefly to let the conductor off, which was when I noticed it.

Same thing go's with the bad lighting rejection. I'll get a couple rejected as backlit. Then I can go on the site and, with out looking for them, find pleanty more that fit that same rejection criteria. NS engines seem to be notorious for this. Solid black from carbody to rail with a feint hint of the lettering on the sides is acceptable.

You know, I appreciate the search and screening process for consistency in only putting up good quality shots. It just doesn't seem to be there half the time. I've had more accepted than I have rejected. Still, this one has me me a little confused. This is a great site and all and I'll still keep it in my favorites. Just some of the practices leave me wondering.

03-15-2004, 03:54 AM
My only criticism of this site is that the screening appears to be inconsistent at times. When I have a photo rejected I try to learn from that to improve. However, when I have a photo rejected for being backlit and turn around to see other photos that are also backlit accepted, I haven’t really learned anything.

Chris Kilroy
03-15-2004, 04:56 AM
For what it's worth (I did not screen either of those photos), I think the angle and composition on Mr. Bell's shot is far superior to the CSX shot.

Emmett't shot is taken from a very good angle (one that, to me, says "open this photo!"), and the physical engine fills almost the entire frame.

The CSX shot, in my opinion, doesn't really say much. I see it as a side-on roster shot, in less-than-perfect lighting, with the back of the engine missing.

A good adage from the world of aviation photography applies here, I think, as well: When shooting a 'roster shot,' include either the whole plane (or train), or make it very obvious what the closeup shot is supposed to represent. There's not much room in between the two for error.

03-15-2004, 09:08 AM
Ok, that's fine that it fills the whole frame and all. No disrespect intended to the other photographers here, but how is the angle that different from this ones? http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=53467

I have seen pleanty more like this. If it was, say just the 'PC' logo on a blue battery door, it wouldn't have made much sense either. The point was the absurdity that PennCentral never owned any SD70ACs or that someone was comparing CSX to Penn Central. Ok, it wasn't that great. Like I said, I've had enough rejected to generally tell what's acceptable and what's not.

ck5644 hit the nail on the head. It's a great site and all, but some times the screening is definetely inconsistent. I usually don't mind, because like ck5644 said, usually I can learn something from the rejection.

And the whole 'bad motive' thing really should be looked at in my opinion. Sitting in a bank parking lot with a machinegun sounds like a bad motive. Not submitting a shot of the front half of a locomotive (or what ever else might qualify) for possible approval. Just my 2 cents.

Chris Starnes
03-15-2004, 02:55 PM
By saying 'bad motive' we generally mean that we are either unable to tell what you are trying to show with a photo and/or the angle/intent of the photo isn't exactly great. As Chris pointed out, there is no real intent that I can see with your photo other than just a snap shot of the front half of a SD70. The other two photos are composed better and offer a clearer 'motive' as to why they were shot.

I can understand what you are saying about screening being inconsistent but with five different sets of eyes looking at photos, the screening will never be perfect. No two photos are the same, a case could be made for every photo's good and bad points. We try to keep that in mind while screening.

As a general rule, if you plan a shot, the result will be much better. By "plan" I mean consider the sun angle, the direction of the train, and how the sun will be used at a certain location. "Picture" the shot before you make it. If you go to your favorite 'railfan' location and just shoot standard wedge shots all day of trains coming and going, your results are going to be much less acceptable.


03-16-2004, 12:56 AM
Understood and thanks for the explanation. I'll still say that the shot is pretty much the same as the one of the front half of the 38-2 or any of they other front half of the engine shots here, but I won't run it into the ground. I think it's gotten enough air.

My only suggestion is that the designation of 'bad motive' might be changed to something like 'unclear intent'. The way you explained it finally makes sense, and I hope you can see the point where some people might be confused or put off by the 'bad' part of that rejection response. It'd be easier to fix or work on if people got the idea that the screener wasn't sure what the point of the photo was than saying the picture in general was submitted with a bad motive. Maybe that's just me, though.

Your other suggestions and comments are noted and I agree with them. Just that sometimes driving 30 miles to work and 30 miles home every day leaves me and others I know less than inclined to do alot of long haul scouting on our days off. This is SW Ohio-home of the 'finest' :roll: drivers in the world (insert sarcasm here!). But, yeah-other locations are better than the usual ones.


03-16-2004, 03:13 PM
I'll offer up my opinion, for what it's worth.

There are a few differences between the GP38 and SD70 picture that tip the balance in favor of the GP38 shot:

1. The angle. The GP38 shot is a dead-on side shot. The SD70 shot is at a slight angle. The "art" of the GP38 shot is that is shows off the geometry of the locomotive. The slight angle of the SD70 shot makes it less "arty" (well, in my opinion, anyway)

2. The sun. The GP38 shot has a very low sun angle which, again, accents the geometry. The SD70 shot has a higher sun angle and more detail, like the wheels, are hidden in shadows.

3. The background. While the bare trees in the SD70 shot form a nice pattern on their own, they detract from the presentation of the locomotive's geometry. The GP38 shot has a clean background.

I actually like the GP38 shot as art better than the Bell Dash9 shot.

The PC and CR logos marked in the dust of the SD70 make are an interesting commentary, and I'm glad I got to see the photo just for that. Perhaps that story, if that was the intent of the photographer, would have been clearer if it had been closer in, showing the cab from frame to cab roof.